Dreamweaver and FrontPage compatibility

I am about to design a new site in Dreamweaver and I got a request from the client that they be able to update the site's content on their own "no fuss, no muss" in frontPage. I was just wondering if anyone has an experience in how well, or if, these two programs work together. I was hoping to use dreamweaver templates, would those transfer over correctly to frontPage?
Thank you for any advice.
Mike

I'll chime in as the others above, present them with the Contribute idea. If
you went the FP route, well, I won't even go there : ) With a minimal
investment (think it's still around $99), you can build the site in DW and
easily setup what can and can't be edited by using Contribute.

Good Luck.

Warren


"bobScott" <webforumsuser (AT) macromedia (DOT) com> wrote

I am about to design a new site in Dreamweaver and I got a request from
the client that they be able to update the site's content on their own "no

fuss, no muss" in frontPage. I was just wondering if anyone has an
experience in how well, or if, these two programs work together. I was
hoping to use dreamweaver templates, would those transfer over correctly to
frontPage?

Thank you for any advice.
Mike

Snak:

Unless they made a drastic change in FP 2003 then they are not compatible
at all.

They didn't have templates before - only shared borders. In FP 2003 they
have DWT file templates that are completely compatible with DW4 (but not
DMX) template markup.

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Team Macromedia Volunteer for Dreamweaver MX
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
news://forums.macromedia.com/macromedia.dreamweaver - THE BEST WAY TO GET
ANSWERS
==================
http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com - Template Triage!
http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.DreamweaverFAQ.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/ - Macromedia (MM) Technotes
==================

"SnakEyez" <webforumsuser (AT) macromedia (DOT) com> wrote

Well up to version 2002 (aka Office XP) Frontpage templates are barely
workable because of the way they are set up. So don't think that they are

the same. Unless they made a drastic change in FP 2003 then they are not
compatible at all.

Personally I wouldn't even try editing pages that have gone through the
other program first. FrontPage 2003 fixed the HTML code minorly, so if they

are using that then editing from both programs is not too bad, but if they
are using 2002 (XP) or earlier then don't bother because sometimes the pages
don't render the same in both editors.

And I do have experience working with that editor along with DW MX, and
GoLive 5 & 6. GoLive and DW are much better working together in comparison

to FP and anything. So I would reconsider doing what you are doing.

Well up to version 2002 (aka Office XP) Frontpage templates are barely workable because of the way they are set up. So don't think that they are the same. Unless they made a drastic change in FP 2003 then they are not compatible at all.

Personally I wouldn't even try editing pages that have gone through the other program first. FrontPage 2003 fixed the HTML code minorly, so if they are using that then editing from both programs is not too bad, but if they are using 2002 (XP) or earlier then don't bother because sometimes the pages don't render the same in both editors.

And I do have experience working with that editor along with DW MX, and GoLive 5 & 6. GoLive and DW are much better working together in comparison to FP and anything. So I would reconsider doing what you are doing.

I recently visited a friend who just got Office XP 2003... Frontpage 2003
included.
I loaded up a DW/ PVII layers based site and after it inflicted the FP
folders it worked a charm.
FP 2003 seems to cater for all the usual stuff but..bearing in mind its the
first time i have seen this - the layers seem to "work" in that they can be
hidden or visible with blinking eye. I did not have to much time to mess
with it myself but I am told FP 2003 can now compete with DW and Golive. AND
it is a lot less expensive than both the others.
I have no plans to use it but it did seem as though good old Bill has
decided to have a wack at DW.
The themes and templates are still about as appealing as colon irrigation
with a fire hose though!

Art


"Murray *TMM*" <forums (AT) HAHAgreat-web-sights (DOT) com> wrote

Snak:

Unless they made a drastic change in FP 2003 then they are not
compatible
at all.

They didn't have templates before - only shared borders. In FP 2003 they
have DWT file templates that are completely compatible with DW4 (but not
DMX) template markup.

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Team Macromedia Volunteer for Dreamweaver MX
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
news://forums.macromedia.com/macromedia.dreamweaver - THE BEST WAY TO GET
ANSWERS
==================
http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com - Template Triage!
http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.DreamweaverFAQ.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/ - Macromedia (MM) Technotes
==================

"SnakEyez" <webforumsuser (AT) macromedia (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:bqfnd6$ipk$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com...
Well up to version 2002 (aka Office XP) Frontpage templates are barely
workable because of the way they are set up. So don't think that they are
the same. Unless they made a drastic change in FP 2003 then they are not
compatible at all.

Personally I wouldn't even try editing pages that have gone through the
other program first. FrontPage 2003 fixed the HTML code minorly, so if
they
are using that then editing from both programs is not too bad, but if they
are using 2002 (XP) or earlier then don't bother because sometimes the
pages
don't render the same in both editors.

And I do have experience working with that editor along with DW MX, and
GoLive 5 & 6. GoLive and DW are much better working together in
comparison
to FP and anything. So I would reconsider doing what you are doing.

Art:

It's only HTML, and given the fact that DW writes no proprietary code in the
page, it's not surprising that everything worked as expected in FP.

I am told FP 2003 can now compete with DW and Golive

Perhaps this is true with GL, but definitely not with DMX, although FP has
now reached near parity with DW4.

The themes and templates are still about as appealing as colon irrigation
with a fire hose though!

How ... err ... picturesque.

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Team Macromedia Volunteer for Dreamweaver MX
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
news://forums.macromedia.com/macromedia.dreamweaver - THE BEST WAY TO GET
ANSWERS
==================
http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com - Template Triage!
http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.DreamweaverFAQ.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/ - Macromedia (MM) Technotes
==================

"Art White...MM Dummy" <art (AT) NOSPAMwebsites-need-help (DOT) fsnet.co.uk> wrote in
message news:bqfron$rju$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com...

I recently visited a friend who just got Office XP 2003... Frontpage 2003
included.
I loaded up a DW/ PVII layers based site and after it inflicted the FP
folders it worked a charm.
FP 2003 seems to cater for all the usual stuff but..bearing in mind its
the
first time i have seen this - the layers seem to "work" in that they can
be
hidden or visible with blinking eye. I did not have to much time to mess
with it myself but I am told FP 2003 can now compete with DW and Golive.
AND
it is a lot less expensive than both the others.
I have no plans to use it but it did seem as though good old Bill has
decided to have a wack at DW.
The themes and templates are still about as appealing as colon irrigation
with a fire hose though!

Art


"Murray *TMM*" <forums (AT) HAHAgreat-web-sights (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:bqfnkp$j6l$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com...
Snak:

Unless they made a drastic change in FP 2003 then they are not
compatible
at all.

They didn't have templates before - only shared borders. In FP 2003 they
have DWT file templates that are completely compatible with DW4 (but not
DMX) template markup.

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Team Macromedia Volunteer for Dreamweaver MX
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
news://forums.macromedia.com/macromedia.dreamweaver - THE BEST WAY TO
GET
ANSWERS
==================
http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com - Template Triage!
http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.DreamweaverFAQ.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/ - Macromedia (MM) Technotes
==================

"SnakEyez" <webforumsuser (AT) macromedia (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:bqfnd6$ipk$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com...
Well up to version 2002 (aka Office XP) Frontpage templates are barely
workable because of the way they are set up. So don't think that they
are
the same. Unless they made a drastic change in FP 2003 then they are
not
compatible at all.

Personally I wouldn't even try editing pages that have gone through
the
other program first. FrontPage 2003 fixed the HTML code minorly, so if
they
are using that then editing from both programs is not too bad, but if
they
are using 2002 (XP) or earlier then don't bother because sometimes the
pages
don't render the same in both editors.

And I do have experience working with that editor along with DW MX,
and
GoLive 5 & 6. GoLive and DW are much better working together in
comparison
to FP and anything. So I would reconsider doing what you are doing.